Discussion: The Guy Lapointe #5 retirement ceremony.

[Mrb1p]

Personnally, it's all about the fact that retiring a jersey means that it makes no sense that another guy would wear it after a guy wore it. I mean, nobody would have ever been able to wear #1 (Plante), #2 (Harvey) #4 (Béliveau), #9 (Richard) and #10 (Lafleur) and #16 (H.Richard). That would have been it. I would have honored the rest by having a "tougher to enter ring of honor" with the other top players. Would have surely recognize as a whole "The big Three", and the top goalies of this franchise (From Hainsworth to Dryden to Roy) 'Cause for this team, it's either you retire a really select number of jerseys. Or you almost retire them all.....'Cause now there's a case for Shutt......Lemaire. Geez, Michel Bergeron started to talk about Claude Provost and Guy Carbonneau. Some in here talk about Koivu. It's ridiculous. They've created a monster because of their inability to ice a decent team, we had to excite the fans with any other ways possible.

Shutt was never even close to being the best player on his team, ditto for Provost and Carbonneau. Lemaire is a legend in its own, probably the best and greatest player to play for 50% of the franchise in the NHL right now so he might have a chance.

The group that is in the rafter is as select as it gets.

 

[Whitesnake]

Shutt was never even close to being the best player on his team, ditto for Provost and Carbonneau. Lemaire is a legend in its own, probably the best and greatest player to play for 50% of the franchise in the NHL right now so he might have a chance.

The group that is in the rafter is as select as it gets.

817 points in 930 games. Right up there with most of them. And not being the best player can also be unfair based on how dominant the teams were. Personnally, there's only 4 other possibilities left. Lemaire and Shutt. Toe Blake as a "bâtisseur". And my outsider nomination...my childhood hero....yes I'm old.....Mats Naslund. While longetivity will hurt him, 1 Cup, 1 Cup Finals, great stats but mostly first-european born to play for the Habs.

 

[S Bah]

I did see him play in person, and I loved that whole 75-79 team, to the core.

And yeah, I'll grant you that the process was somewhat arbitrary. They waited way too long to honour Butch Bouchard, and especially Guy Lapointe. Lapointe was every bit as good as Savard, and it was he who always had to carry the #4 or #5 defenceman as a partner, since Serge and Larry played together 85% of the time. My late father's two favourite players were Lemaire and Lapointe, and unfortunately he passed away without either of them getting a flag raised to the rafters. So I have to say it was a very emotional night for my son and I on Saturday, to be there in the Bell Center and witness an injustice corrected.

Just two more, and I will be happy. Jacques Lemaire, who would have won the Selke trophy multiple times had it existed in his day, and Steve Shutt, a remarkably prolific scorer for 9 straight years, four of them at 45 goals or more, and once hitting 60.

Yes to arbitrary, no to blaming Gainey for that. Pierre Boivin was a very stubborn man, and if he did not like someone, forget it. I don't know what Guy Lapointe ever did to him, maybe shake his hand with Vaseline on it or something. I love that Geoff Molson has taken over.

Come on Geoff (and Serge?), just two more, you can do it!

Just watched the entire ceremony again, the first time I had my family visiting for my 60th Bday, so I missed a lot of Guy Lapointe's modest and straight forward thanks to all the people in his career, very touching and poignant. His tributes to every person, trainers, coaches, players, fans, etc., truly recognizing the importance of all of their contributions which made the Habs so very great Champions. His value in the dressing room, becomes even clearer after hearing his words, no person involved in his career went unnoticed, or having pranks pulled on them, probably his way of acknowledging people, without pointing them out maybe embarrassing them, but with great humor, allowing others to receive some recognition due them, just my opinion. Great hockey player, yes, but also a very caring and sharing person is what I perceived from his thanks to everyone!

The idea of raising Jacques Lemaire's # 25, is certainly worthy, as any fan that watched him play as a Hab. How many Stanley Cups would the Habs have won without Lemaire, very few during his time if any at all. The Habs team were solid throughout, Lemaire deserves his share of credit for his 24/7 effort and outstanding play during playoffs as well, when he actually turned it up a few notches and was always in the Conn Smythe debate. Great two way center & LW, with a great shot, skating, passing, checking and team player through and throughout his entire career regular season also. I know as Lapointe & Lemaire were two of my favorite Habs, always worked hard and I thought it was a shame that Lemaire wasn't invited to join Team Canada, he would have excelled playing against the Elite International, as he did on the famed New Year's Eve 3-3 tie with Russia in 1975. Anyone that thinks Lemaire could skate into corners without breaking eggs, never watched him play, it's that simple watch the New Years Eve game or any of the 70's Stanley Cup games, then point out one time he avoided contact when chasing the puck, that's absurdity.

 

[InglewoodJack]

Maybe it's because Saku wasn't all that good a hockey player and the lockerroom toward the end of his stint with the Habs was fragmented and in shambles.

Gainey, a man of tradition, and Gillette and Boivin, who loved Koivu, were rather okay with him being unceremoniously excised from the team.

Might be that you just have a fetish for retiring numbers?

At his prime, Saku was a very good hockey player. Don't give me that BS about the fragmented locker room. That period was mired by all sorts of press rumours. Strongly doubt it was Saku's fault.

I like seeing great and influential players get their proper respect. that's all.

 

[WhiskeySeven*]

At his prime, Saku was a very good hockey player. Don't give me that BS about the fragmented locker room. That period was mired by all sorts of press rumours. Strongly doubt it was Saku's fault.

I like seeing great and influential players get their proper respect. that's all.

Guy Carbonneau was a GREAT hockey player in his prime, better offensively and won two cups and he's not even in the discussion. Koivu was not even a league-wide "good" player in his prime.

Koivu will be honoured this season and it'll be a nice ceremony, he won't have his number retired because that's a slap in the face of real champions. Koivu didn't win anything, individually or otherwise with the Habs or in the NHL.

 

[BaseballCoach]

Shutt was never even close to being the best player on his team, ditto for Provost and Carbonneau. Lemaire is a legend in its own, probably the best and greatest player to play for 50% of the franchise in the NHL right now so he might have a chance.

The group that is in the rafter is as select as it gets.

There are only a handful of players in NHL history who have scored 30 or more goals nine straight seasons, and also very few who have scored 60 goals in one season.

Furthermore, Shutt was on the first line of Team Canada 1976, the greatest team ever assembled.

Shutt is in elite company. He was not the best player of his team because of his role, and the strength of his teammates, but he played his role to perfection and was still decent defensively and not a liability like some completely one-dimensional scorers.

 

[Kimota]

Personnally, it's all about the fact that retiring a jersey means that it makes no sense that another guy would wear it after a guy wore it. I mean, nobody would have ever been able to wear #1 (Plante), #2 (Harvey) #4 (Béliveau), #9 (Richard) and #10 (Lafleur) and #16 (H.Richard). That would have been it. I would have honored the rest by having a "tougher to enter ring of honor" with the other top players. Would have surely recognize as a whole "The big Three", and the top goalies of this franchise (From Hainsworth to Dryden to Roy) 'Cause for this team, it's either you retire a really select number of jerseys. Or you almost retire them all.....'Cause now there's a case for Shutt......Lemaire. Geez, Michel Bergeron started to talk about Claude Provost and Guy Carbonneau. Some in here talk about Koivu. It's ridiculous. They've created a monster because of their inability to ice a decent team, we had to excite the fans with any other ways possible.

The way they should have done this is retire the numbers and jerseys as much as you can but honour only the greatest with a banner.

Like for example you can retire the numbers of all the best out of respect but don't do the whole ceremony. Just do that for a select club of sort.

In this select group you would have:

Morenz
Plante
Rocket
Beliveau
Harvey
Boom Boom
Lafleur

And in front of the Bell Centre, I would have one statue, of the Rocket, and this one would be huge.

In an ideal World, that's what would be.

 

[BaseballCoach]

The way they should have done this is retire the numbers and jerseys as much as you can but honour only the greatest with a banner.

Like for example you can retire the numbers of all the best out of respect but don't do the whole ceremony. Just do that for a select club of sort.

In this select group you would have:

Morenz
Plante
Rocket
Beliveau
Harvey
Boom Boom
Lafleur

And in front of the Bell Centre, I would have one statue, of the Rocket, and this one would be huge.

In an ideal World, that's what would be.

Larry Robinson could skate circles around Doug Harvey, had a better shot, was a harder hitter and better fighter. Not that Doug Harvey wasn't great or didn't deserve to have his number retired, but honestly to drool over a team that won consistently when there were only 6 teams and virtually ignore the one when there were 16 teams, and to elevate Geoffrion to God-like status, it is obvious that there is a generational bias here.

 

[Kimota]

Larry Robinson could skate circles around Doug Harvey, had a better shot, was a harder hitter and better fighter. Not that Doug Harvey wasn't great or didn't deserve to have his number retired, but honestly to drool over a team that won consistently when there were only 6 teams and virtually ignore the one when there were 16 teams, and to elevate Geoffrion to God-like status, it is obvious that there is a generational bias here.

Larry was great but Harvey is second only to Orr as the best D of all time.

Boom Boom was one of the most dominant players of his generation, winning more than a few scoring titles. If Rocket would not exist, he would have been "the" Habs legend.

But if you want to put Larry in the special Habs elite, go ahead, I don't care. Maybe I missed his name there. Won't be an issue with me.

 

[Whitesnake]

Larry Robinson could skate circles around Doug Harvey, had a better shot, was a harder hitter and better fighter. Not that Doug Harvey wasn't great or didn't deserve to have his number retired, but honestly to drool over a team that won consistently when there were only 6 teams and virtually ignore the one when there were 16 teams, and to elevate Geoffrion to God-like status, it is obvious that there is a generational bias here.

Different eras, diffferent style of players. Jacques Plante would have a Save% of .125 in today's league. People talk about how Bobby Orr revolutionized the position on D by being more up and down offensively, while in the end, it's Doug Harvey who started it all more frequently. Not as explosive as Orr obviously, but Harvey reallly started it all with great success.

Having said that....I also would have nothing against Robinson up there. But only him. The day you decided to get Savard in there too, it had to meant that Lapointe had to be included as well.

 

[BaseballCoach]

Different eras, diffferent style of players. Jacques Plante would have a Save% of .125 in today's league. People talk about how Bobby Orr revolutionized the position on D by being more up and down offensively, while in the end, it's Doug Harvey who started it all more frequently. Not as explosive as Orr obviously, but Harvey reallly started it all with great success.

Having said that....I also would have nothing against Robinson up there. But only him. The day you decided to get Savard in there too, it had to meant that Lapointe had to be included as well.

Doug Harvey got 540 pts in 1113 games 0.48 PPG
Tom Johnson got 264 pts in 979 games 0.27 PPG
Larry Robinson 958 points in 1384 games 0.69 PPG

Robinson had as big a lead over Harvey in scoring per game as Harvey had over his teammate Tom Johnson

Robinson was also defensively strong, being the all-time NHL leader for +/-. That he could fight too was a bonus, not a critical variable, but yet another dimension.

Different era or not, Big Bird would put Doug Harvey in his back pocket. My Dad said this often even though Doug Harvey was our neighbour and his favourite player in the 1950s. And Robinson wasn't even his favourite 70s defenceman, Lapointe was.

 

[Scintillating10]

Doug Harvey got 540 pts in 1113 games 0.48 PPG
Tom Johnson got 264 pts in 979 games 0.27 PPG
Larry Robinson 958 points in 1384 games 0.69 PPG

Robinson had as big a lead over Harvey in scoring per game as Harvey had over his teammate Tom Johnson

Robinson was also defensively strong, being the all-time NHL leader for +/-. That he could fight too was a bonus, not a critical variable, but yet another dimension.

Different era or not, Big Bird would put Doug Harvey in his back pocket. My Dad said this often even though Doug Harvey was our neighbour and his favourite player in the 1950s. And Robinson wasn't even his favourite 70s defenceman, Lapointe was.

That's a single opinion...I know people who are convinced Trottier was better than Gretzky...don't make it fact. Harvey widely considered second best defenseman of all-time, not sure Robinson makes top 6. Harvey was best of his time, Robinson likely wasn't between Orr and Potvin. doubt all those veteran hockey people are wrong.

 

[Whitesnake]

Doug Harvey got 540 pts in 1113 games 0.48 PPG
Tom Johnson got 264 pts in 979 games 0.27 PPG
Larry Robinson 958 points in 1384 games 0.69 PPG

Robinson had as big a lead over Harvey in scoring per game as Harvey had over his teammate Tom Johnson

Robinson was also defensively strong, being the all-time NHL leader for +/-. That he could fight too was a bonus, not a critical variable, but yet another dimension.

Different era or not, Big Bird would put Doug Harvey in his back pocket. My Dad said this often even though Doug Harvey was our neighbour and his favourite player in the 1950s. And Robinson wasn't even his favourite 70s defenceman, Lapointe was.

I think it's extremely hard to compare. Harvey started to revolutionize the position yet, the position was not at the state where Robinson took it. And Look at the first years of Harvey and you'll see how bad, aside from the Rocket, the offense was compared to Robinson's period. Then around 1954 or something, it started to look much better. Only starting in 1954 did you see our guys starting to rack more than 70 points. Robinson era, from the start of his career, was probably the biggest offensive powerhouse of the history of the NHL pointwise.

Harvey was not as agile as Robinson. True. And because of that era, he was not as offensive but for his era....he was one of the best. But he was a rock defensively. And was pretty tough himself.

And watch the scoring of all-time leaders amongst d-man. Of all the d-men in the league that has played in the 40s and 50s, he is 2nd (48th overall), behind Bill Gadsby who is 42nd. Then, we might look at PPG stats, well yes, he is 102nd....for now and will surely go down as the years progresses. Yet again, amongst the guys that has played in his era or before, he's top 3, most definately behind Eddie Shore. And some other obscure names that has half of the games he played. Does that mean they would have been better if they would have played those games....or would have seen their number plummet with more games in hand....And you can't take the overall PPG stats and apply to guys from all era as Harvey as a PPG of .485 while John-Michael Liles right now is at .482......Go on the list and you'll see that PPG can be really misleading....True, Robinson is at .692, and yet Reed Larson is at .758 and nobody will convince me that he was better than Robinson even offensively....And I'm never going to think that Steve Duchesne who's just at .676, is almost as good as Robinson was.

http://www.quanthockey.com/nhl/records/nhl-defensemen-all-time-points-per-game-leaders.html

Anyway, in the end, it's all about preference and understanding and trying as best as we can to use context. But then it's also a question of opinion when nobody is right and wrong....